“I happen to feel that the filibuster did nothing. They got nothing out of it. There was nothing gained by it,” Trump told the hosts via telephone.

Paul was protesting at the confirmation hearing of CIA director John Brennan, but used his filibuster to draw attention to the drone policy and its limitations. The next day, Attorney General Eric Holder released a memo clarifying that President Barack Obama doesn’t have the authority to use drones domestically, which Paul considered a victory.

But Trump argued that since Brennan was voted in anyway, Paul’s filibuster was rendered moot, even though Paul wasn’t protesting his confirmation.

“It was just a protest, and we need more than protests, we need action,” he said. “It didn’t stop the Brennan disaster, which is what it should have really, the purpose should have been for that.”

Overall, Paul’s filibuster has been praised on both sides of the political aisle, for raising a larger discussion about the controversial drone program. However, some Republicans have criticized the junior Senator for drawing attention away from real issues and being too melodramatic about the drone program.

Republican senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham criticized Paul of presenting a “ridiculous” and “simply false” argument last week, and that his filibuster was aimed at a non-existent threat.

Senator Ted Cruz introduced a measure last week which would put Holder’s explanation of drone restrictions into law. The bill says that any killing of a U.S. citizen on American soil by a drone is illegal, unless the individual poses an “imminent threat.” Some have criticized this legislation of leaving some room for the U.S. government to order drone killings of its own citizens domestically.

Do you think that the drone program is a genuine threat to American safety and security?